I dt.o4.04.2025, served on the 2nd petitioner on 12.04.2025, Pending disposal of wp No. 14618 of 2025, on the file of'the High Court.

The court while direct-lng issue:-of notice to the Respondents herein to show cause as to why this applicat,:!'o`ri:'Sh+6uld not be complied with, made the following order.(The receipt of this-:6'rjrier-wi[[ be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the case), The Court made``|-ffiS`'foIIowing ORDER Eflmpugning the not:ice of d6-]ha'a'nd issued by respondent No.2 v,-de RRC.No.GRVSP/DOVZM71/7813/1y4E=/z-6^1/2025/73, dated 04.04.2025 (Ex.P1 ), the above writ petition is `fil6tdi Heard Sri V. Srinjvas, leap,ned Senior Counsel assisted by + I•-._rl: ;_hi'-;-..

smt.p.Lakshmi Priyanvitha, ]earne`¢_.-`¢9unSel for the Petitioner. 4 i.:!-i_]f?;:-

As seen from the mateFial`'`!:rifai[able on record, the petitioner deposited the entire contributiom. However, the same was wrongly, deposited in Account No.10 insteadi-,,of Account No.1 and vice-versa. In fact, the authority considered the sa'id fact in the order, is of the opinion that it has no jurisdiction to adjulstlth'e':contribution.

'.--I_€,i--,i:I.iii -<'-I_ _

whether the authority got jur`isdibtion to adJ-uSt the